London Wider Waste Strategy - London - Greater London Authority

More documents

Recommendations

Info

authorities did operate a facility; these were UAs who each operated a waste transfer stations. Two of the five waste transfer stations were on the river (Northumberland Wharf and Walbrook Wharf). The collection authorities were then asked about how waste is transported. Of the 17 authorities that answered this question, over half (i.e. 13) used exclusively diesel fuelled lorries. (8 WCAs and 5 UAs). However, four authorities used alternative fuels to a greater or lesser extent as follows: • One WCA used exclusively LPG fuelled lorries. • One UA used up to 25% LPG and remainder was diesel. • One UA had up to 10% of its wastes transported by a combination of LPG and battery fuelled vehicles. • One WCA used up to 5% of vehicles fuelled by LPG. Respondents were then asked to provide information on waste tonnages for commercial and industrial wastes collected within their borough in 2002/3. Two authorities did not answer this question. The information is summarised in Table E4 below. Table E4: Tonnages of Commercial and Industrial wastes collected by responding London Local Authorities Authority Minimum Maximum Average Median Totals WCA 600 28,544 14,209 14,280 127,885 UA 8,000 141,349 45,941 22,000 321,588 Totals 600 141,349 28,092 16,612 449,473 Base: this question was answered by 16 authorities (nine WCAs and seven UAs) From Table E4, it can be seen that the Authorities that we surveyed collect just under 450,000 tonnes of commercial and industrial wastes. Just over two thirds of this was collected by the UAs and just under a third by the WCAs. Our survey results suggest that the commercial and industrial wastes collection services operated by the WCAs are of a much smaller scale than those operated by the UAs; the WCAs have a lower range, a lower average and a lower median. Of those authorities that collected industrial as well as commercial wastes, most respondents provided a combined total to the question on tonnages. Therefore, it was not possible to provide a breakdown between commercial and industrial wastes from a tonnage perspective. This question also asked for tonnages for materials for recycling and composting. Just one authority (UA) gave a recycling figure of 3,129 tonnes whilst a WCA noted that they collected a negligible amount which was not measured separately. The questionnaire then proceeded to ask authorities if they could estimate how much of the total commercial waste arisings collected for or on behalf of the WCA for non-household wastes could fall into the categories in the table below. A number of the authorities were unable to provide approximate proportions of these commercial wastes, with eight giving no response to this question. Five were able to provide data, with the majority of wastes coming from offices, hotels and retail premises for most of these respondents. However, one authority only gave a 166
proportion of waste collected from markets and fairs, and another collected the majority of its commercial wastes from Local Authority and Government buildings. Table E5: Analysis of commercial and industrial waste arisings collected by responding local authorities by sector WCA 1 WCA 2 WCA 3 WCA 4 Offices 38 25 * 40 0 30 * 48 45 Hospitality 15 30 * 10 0 30 * 24 35 Retail 40 35 * 40 0 40 * 19 18 LA / Gov’t 5 5 0 5 95 0 * 5 0 1 Parks 0 1 0 1 0 5 0 0 * 2 0.5 Markets 0 1 5 0 0 1 0 0 2.6% 4 0.1 1.5 Others 2 2 WCA 5 UA 1 UA 2 UA 3 0 1 0 0 1 5 3 0 * 1.9 0 Notes: Base: nine respondents. Offices: private offices and businesses etc. Hospitality: hotels, pubs, clubs, catering etc. Parks: municipal parks and gardens. *: No data provided. 1. No answer provided; assumed to be 0 from checking other results. 2. Identified by respondent as garages and other miscellaneous industrial premises which are small operations. 3. Identified by respondent as waste from street trading. 4. Percentage calculated from data provided by respondent. Whilst there is considerable variation between the authorities, the above table allows us to draw some findings. In most cases the major sectors in terms of proportion are offices and retail followed by hospitality. The exception is a WCA which was 95% from local authorities and government buildings. Four authorities collected [relatively small proportion] of wastes from markets and fairs. The relatively small number of respondents precludes aggregating the data or undertaking further analysis. The authorities were asked how the figures that they provided in the questionnaires were determined. The findings are presented in the following table. Table E6: How are the figures for commercial and industrial wastes that you have provided determined? Authority WCA UA Totals Separate collection and weighbridge 0 1 1 Mixed collection and based on recent local survey(s) 167 2 3 5 UA 4
Page 1 and 2:
Policy & Partnerships London Wider
Page 3:
CONTENTS 1. Introduction 1 2. Waste
Page 6 and 7:
Chapter 2 summarises the principal
Page 8 and 9:
Key policy proposals in ‘Waste St
Page 10 and 11:
2.8. The national Planning Policy G
Page 12 and 13:
• where waste cannot be dealt wit
Page 14 and 15:
Policies of neighbouring regions 2.
Page 16 and 17:
• A Thematic Strategy on waste re
Page 18 and 19:
2.34. Legislation applying to speci
Page 20 and 21:
addresses eight main environmental
Page 22 and 23:
3.19. The London Regional Technical
Page 24 and 25:
4.3. There then follows a section o
Page 26 and 27:
Table 4.1: Arisings and basic compo
Page 28 and 29:
Table 4.3: Total commercial and ind
Page 30 and 31:
around London but not on the quanti
Page 32 and 33:
Table 4.6: Number and weight of sam
Page 34 and 35:
through a 20mm sieve Total 73 27.4
Page 36 and 37:
handling and transport in London, r
Page 38 and 39:
4.66. Not surprisingly, all of the
Page 40 and 41:
some construction companies had the
Page 42 and 43:
necessary that the waste producers
Page 44 and 45:
4.101. One other potential major in
Page 46 and 47:
SMEs comprise a slightly lower prop
Page 48 and 49:
Drivers for Sustainable Waste Manag
Page 50 and 51:
4.123. Whilst sustainable waste man
Page 52 and 53:
Encouragement of waste minimisation
Page 54 and 55:
companies. There is no service offe
Page 56 and 57:
their companies than the larger com
Page 58 and 59:
such as road construction, it close
Page 60 and 61:
LREs wishing to model the viability
Page 62 and 63:
Table 4.10: Eco-sites established w
Page 64 and 65:
• Support for the development and
Page 66 and 67:
two internationally recognised stan
Page 68 and 69:
London. A phased approach is recomm
Page 70 and 71:
encouraged, and that guidance and/o
Page 72 and 73:
number of employees of perhaps some
Page 74 and 75:
4.230. The NHS provided a detailed
Page 76 and 77:
4.241. For over half of the WCAs th
Page 78 and 79:
5. Construction and Demolition Wast
Page 80 and 81:
5.7. The findings for England and W
Page 82 and 83:
City Limits 5.14. An alternative re
Page 84 and 85:
Figure 5.1: Average total waste ari
Page 86 and 87:
5.23. The hazardous waste component
Page 88 and 89:
5.29. Nevertheless, the data estima
Page 90 and 91:
Consultations 5.38. Consultations w
Page 92 and 93:
to be so in to the future. However
Page 94 and 95:
visit and review specific pages. A
Page 96 and 97:
European Literature Review and Cons
Page 99 and 100:
6. Special/Hazardous Waste Introduc
Page 101 and 102:
‘Technical Assessment for Waste M
Page 103 and 104:
accurate record of hazardous waste
Page 105 and 106:
Figure 6.2: Breakdown of recorded h
Page 107 and 108:
wastes to London are the closest, i
Page 109:
Figure 6.4: Breakdown of hazardous
Page 112 and 113:
6.47. There are a range of views fr
Page 114 and 115:
Table 6.5: In-house landfills which
Page 116 and 117:
equirements for the ‘new’ hazar
Page 118 and 119:
options to improve treatment, such
Page 120 and 121: 6.80. However, the new hazardous wa
Page 122 and 123: 6.90. The future treatment of asbes
Page 124 and 125: 7.7. London’s total hazardous was
Page 126 and 127: 7.19. There is only limited composi
Page 128 and 129: waste management obligations and be
Page 130 and 131: construction and demolition compani
Page 132 and 133: the precise amount of landfill capa
Page 134 and 135: R.14 In order to more effectively t
Page 136 and 137: R32 It is recommended that a reduct
Page 138 and 139: measurement of wastes from construc
Page 140 and 141: Future Actions Table 7.1: Summary o
Page 142 and 143: Theme 3: Support for Existing Initi
Page 144 and 145: for contaminated soils within Londo
Page 147 and 148: Appendix A: Waste policy and legisl
Page 149 and 150: • whole used tyres (from 2003);
Page 151 and 152: UK Policy The majority of UK waste
Page 153 and 154: • Requires consents to discharge
Page 155 and 156: • Prohibits certain types of wast
Page 157 and 158: Green Paper on PVC Key Features •
Page 159 and 160: Chris Searles, Searles Associates D
Page 161 and 162: Table C1. Data by Number (from Smal
Page 163 and 164: Appendix D: Results of Further Anal
Page 165 and 166: Total 100 598.8 70.7 423.4 29.8 178
Page 167 and 168: Appendix E: Local Authority C&I Col
Page 169: All of the respondents said that th
Page 173 and 174: Finally, the authorities were asked
Page 175 and 176: The authorities were asked how the
Page 177 and 178: All authorities were asked how they
Page 179 and 180: Table E11: Do you expect to meet th
Page 181 and 182: Table E15: What is the situation re
Page 183 and 184: Appendix F: Consultees for Construc
Page 185 and 186: Appendix G: Policy, legislative and
Page 187 and 188: Measure Germany Denmark Belgium The
Page 189 and 190: Measure Germany Denmark Belgium The
show all

London Wider Waste Strategy - London - Greater London Authority

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?